Synthesis and olfactory evaluation of bulky moiety-modified analogues to the sandalwood odorant polysantol

Article abstract of DOI:10.3390/molecules14082780

Five new bulky moiety-modified analogues of the sandalwood odorant Polysantol have been synthesized by aldol condensation of appropriate aldehydes with butanone, deconjugative α-methylation of the resulting α,β-unsaturated ketones, and reduction of the co

Full text of DOI:10.3390/molecules14082780

Molecules 2009, 14, 2780-2800; doi:10.3390/molecules14082780
OPEN ACCESS
molecules
ISSN 1420-3049
www.mdpi.com/journal/molecules
Article
Synthesis and Olfactory Evaluation of Bulky Moiety-Modified
Analogues to the Sandalwood Odorant Polysantol®
Laura Chapado, Pablo J. Linares-Palomino, Concepción Badía, Sofía Salido, Manuel Nogueras,
Adolfo Sánchez and Joaquín Altarejos *
Departamento de Química Inorgánica y Orgánica, Facultad de Ciencias Experimentales, Universidad
de Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-mail: jaltare@ujaen.es;
Tel. +34 953 212743; Fax: +34 953 211876
Received: 17 June 2009; in revised form: 21 July 2009 / Accepted: 27 July 2009 /
Published: 28 July 2009
Abstract: Five new bulky moiety-modified analogues of the sandalwood odorant
Polysantol® have been synthesized by aldol condensation of appropriate aldehydes with
butanone, deconjugative -methylation of the resulting -unsaturated ketones, and
reduction of the corresponding -unsaturated ketones. The final compounds were
evaluated organoleptically and one of them seemed to be of special interest for its natural
sandalwood scent.
Keywords: sandalwood odorants; Polysantol® analogues; nopol derivative; odour
evaluation
1. Introduction
(–)-(Z)-β-Santalol (1), the main constituent of natural sandalwood oil, is an odour compound with
typical sandalwood fragrance and is described as warm-woody, creamy and sweet with an animalic
tonality [1,2]. It consists of a bulky bicyclic moiety separated from the hydroxyl group by an
unsaturated 5 C-atoms spacer [3]. The best synthetic substitutes for this noble perfumery raw material
are a series of trimethylcyclopentenyl alkenols, such as 2−5 [4,5], derived from campholenic aldehyde.
The structural similarities between β-santalol and these substitutes, regarding the bulky lipophile, the
spacer and the osmophoric polar hydroxyl group, seems to be clear (Figure 1), Polysantol® (2) being

Molecules 2009, 14
2781
the most expensive and appreciated by perfumers [3]. The structure–odour properties of this compound
and a series of derivatives have been studied [6–8]. The structure of olfactory receptors and the
corresponding mechanism of interaction between receptor proteins and odour molecules, rewarded by
the 2004 Nobel Prize [9,10], are still little known. Therefore, the determination of essential structural
elements responsible for the sandalwood-type sensation can be only performed by molecular similarity
studies within a series of sandalwood odour compounds and structurally similar, but odourless,
molecules. As is well known [3,11], three subunits are important for the sandalwood odour impression
(Figure 1), which correspond to the hydroxyl group (A), a lipophilic substituent (B) in the
neighbourhood of this hydroxyl group, and a bulky rigid hydrophobic moiety (C). This set of structural
features constitutes the sandalwood olfactophore. In this way, some fragrance chemists assumed that
the vicinity of the osmophore must be crucial for the odour and this flexible spacer became the main
object of structure–odour sandalwood studies [12]. On the other hand, the analysis of structure–odour
relationship (SOR) data allowed to postulate that the geometry of the immediate proximity of the
osmophoric hydroxyl group tolerates less variations than the orientation of the more distant lipophilic
bulky group [3]. For that reason the bulky moiety of the trimethylcyclopentenyl group in campholenal
derivatives 2−5 has been replaced by structures of similar steric bulk (6 [13], 7 [14], 8 [15], 9 [16], 10
[17], 11 [18]).
As a continuation of our previous studies on the synthesis of odorants [19–21], we have developed a
collection of several substitutes of sandalwood scent [22–24]. As other authors have done [7,8,25], we
have studied the influence of the global shape of the hydrophobic moiety C, and for the refinement of
the olfactophore model on compounds structurally similar to Polysantol®, five new compounds 33−37
(Figure 3) have been synthesized for this work and their odour evaluated. These molecules have been
obtained from the aldehydes 1215 and 18, respectively, through a straightforward process involving
the aldol condensation of each starting aldehyde with butanone, the deconjugative α-methylation of the
respective enones and the reduction of the corresponding -unsaturated ketone to yield every alcohol
analogue to the odorant Polysantol® (see Scheme 2 below).
Figure 1. β-Santalol and odorants 2–5 derived from campholenic aldehyde.

Molecules 2009, 14
Figure 2. Other sandalwood-type odorants with different bulky moieties.
2782
Figure 3. The target analogues of the sandalwood odorant Polysantol®.
2. Results and Discussion
2.1. Synthesis
As starting materials for the synthesis of alcohols 33–37, the commercially available acyclic
isovaleraldehyde (12), heptanal (13), citronellal (14), and the cyclic phenylacetaldehyde (15) and (1R)-
(–)-nopol (16) [26] have been chosen. The latter was previously transformed into (1S,2S,5S)-
dihydronopal (18), in a two-step process, by stereoselective heterogeneous hydrogenation using
platinum oxide as catalyst [19,27] and subsequent oxidation of the primary alcohol to an aldehyde with
pyridinium dichromate (PDC) [29].
2.1.1. Conversion of nopol (16) into dihydronopal (18)
According to the findings of Heitmann and Mätzel [27], the use of Adams’ catalyst in methanol with
a low hydrogen pressure allowed us to obtain cis-dihydronopol (17) [28,29] in good yield (90%) and
with high diastereoselectivity. Therefore, the substituent in the 2 position is cis with respect to the
gem-dimethyl bridge in 17 (Scheme 1).

Molecules 2009, 14
2783
Scheme 1. Selective hydrogenation of nopol and oxidation of cis-dihydronopol under mild
conditions.
The structure of this compound was assigned by standard spectroscopic analytical techniques (IR,
1
MS, H-NMR, 13C-NMR, 2D NMR). The bicyclic system of the [3.1.1]hept-2-yl group presents
several particularly troublesome spectroscopic problems, since its structural complexity leads to strong
couplings among nuclei, resulting in severe spectral overlap. Nevertheless, some unambiguous
conclusions may be obtained. Thus, the final assignment of the chemical shifts and coupling constants
of all compounds of this series (17, 18, 27, 32, 37) are given taking into account the syn (s) and anti (a)
protons, which correspond to equatorial or axial protons of a cyclohexane moiety (Figure 4).
Figure 4. (1S,2S,5S)-2-(6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl)ethanol (17).
1
The H-NMR of 17 has undoubtedly lost the characteristic tt signal of the olefinic methyne H-3’
seen in 16. In 17 the new methyne H-2’ appears as a ddq (δ 2.12, J2’-1’=2.0 Hz, J2’-3’a-2=7.1 Hz,
J2’-3’s=11.0 Hz). The coupling constants between H2’–H3’a and H2’–H3’s could be consistent with
dihedral angles H2’–C–C–H3’a and H2’–C–C–H3’s of ca. 124º and 10º, respectively, according to the
Karplus equation [31,32]. These observations not only provide evidence for the necessary axial
position of the new H-2’ proton, but also confirm the postulate that the cyclohexane ring is flattened,
confirming the outcome of the diastereoselective hydrogenation. The difference between the protons of
the CH2-7’ methylene bridge is characteristic of these type of bicyclic [3.1.1]heptane skeletons in a
bridged-chair or bridged-boat conformation. Thus, proton 7’a appears as a ddt (δ 2.33, J7’a-7’s=9.3 Hz,
J7’a-1’-5’=6.2 Hz, J7’a-4’a=2.0 Hz) on the basis of the geminal coupling with H-7’s, similar couplings with
H-1’ and H-5’ and the W long-range coupling with H-4’a. However, the 7’s proton (δ 0.90) appears as

Molecules 2009, 14
2784
a d because of a single geminal coupling. The different resonance signals of the two methyl groups on
C-6’, due to the magnetic anisotropy of the cyclobutane ring, is also characteristic of this skeleton.
Hence, Me-8’ (equatorial) always appears ca 0.4 ppm deshielded respect to Me-9’ (axial) in 2-α-
pinene derivatives (such as 16). Nevertheless, in 2-αH-pinane derivatives (such as 17) the less rigid
geometry compared to the saturated system produces an appreciable change in the resonance position
of the equatorial and axial methyl groups on C-6’, the Δδ between them being now ca. 0.1 ppm. The
highly overlapped region of δ 1.80−2.00, corresponding to the 1’, 3’s, 4’a, 4’s and 5’ protons was too
poorly separated for determination of coupling constants. However, the chemical shifts of such protons
were obtained from the 2D NMR shift correlations (HSQC, HMBC, COSY and NOESY). In addition,
homodecoupling experiments were also performed to obtain some coupling constants. In general, the
relationship δHa < δHe is valid, except for H-4, where 4a (an equatorial proton) resonates at higher
field than 4s (an axial proton), which is in accordance with the finding for protons attached to a
cyclohexane ring [31]. The conversion of dihydronopol (17) into dihydronopal (18) [33] was
performed by reaction with PDC under standard conditions affording 18 in a 75% yield (Scheme 1).
2.1.2. Aldol condensation of the aldehydes 1215 and 18 with butanone to give the -unsaturated
ketones 19, 20, 22, 24 and 27
The starting aldehydes 1215 and 18 were reacted with butanone by aldol condensation. Thus,
isovaleraldehyde (12) yielded the -unsaturated ketone 19 using potassium hydroxide as catalyst
[34] (Scheme 2). The intermediate β-hydroxyketone was directly dehydrated by azeotropic distillation
in dry toluene and p-toluenesulfonic acid [23,35]. The crude 19 obtained was purified by flash
chromatography to afford pure 19 in 88% yields.
For the synthesis of 20 [36], heptanal (13) was reacted in a similar manner; aldol reaction with
butanone followed by p-toluenesulfonic acid-assisted dehydration. The α,β-unsaturated ketone 20 was
obtained in 71% yield [38]. The spectroscopic properties of 20 and 19 are alike with respect to the
synthon C1–C5, and regarding 21, the aldol self-condensation by-product derived from 13, the NMR
data agree with those already reported [39].
When citronellal (14) was used as starting aldehyde, the aldol condensation with butanone to obtain
the α,β-unsaturated ketone 22 was performed using a basic thermal dehydration instead the acid
dehydration [40]. This was necessary because although all the aldol condensation attempts via acid
dehydration led to the desired 22, it immediately underwent an intramolecular Michael-type reaction
that led first to a six-membered ring closure, and then, after subsequent capture of the emerging
tertiary cation by the enol oxygen, to a second ring closure [41].
As in the case described by Sasaki [41], we only obtained the trans-fused hexahydroisochromene
23. This stereoselective nonsynchronous bicyclization may be rationalized taking into account the rule
for 1,2-disubstituted cyclohexane compounds. According to that, the thermodynamically more stable
conformation is that with more alkyl groups adopting the equatorial position. As displayed in Scheme
3, rotamer I leads to a cis-1,2-disubstituted cyclohexane (one axial and the other equatorial) whereas
rotamer II leads to a trans-1,2-disubstituted cyclohexane with both groups in equatorial position. In
addition to this energetic argument, it seems that in a trans-1,2-disubstituted eq–eq conformation the

Molecules 2009, 14
2785
oxygen of the enol function and the carbocation centre are likely closer for the second cyclization than
that in a cis-1,2-disubstituted eq–ax conformation.
Scheme 2. Syntheses of 33-37.
CHO
CHO
13
12
CHO
CHO
CHO
14
15
18
(1)
O
(2a) or (2b)
O
R
19 R: isopropyl, 88%
20 R: n-pentyl, 71%
22 R: 1,5-dimethyl-4-hexen-1-yl, 52%
24 R: phenyl, 62%
27 R: 6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl, 56%
(3)
(4)
O
R
28 R: isopropyl, 77%
29 R: n-pentyl, 42%
30 R: 1,5-dimethyl-4-hexen-1-yl, 55%
31 R: phenyl, 84%
32 R: 6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl, 85%
(5)
OH
OH
33 (62%)
34 (76%)
OH
OH
OH
35 (90%)
36 (80%)
37 (77%)
Reagents and conditions: (1) KOH/MeOH, (2a) p-TsOH/toluene, (2b) , (3) KtBuO/DMF, (4) MeI,
(5) NaBH4/MeOH.

Molecules 2009, 14
Scheme 3. Intramolecular Michael-type ring closure reactions followed by cis and trans
2786
cation intermediates capture by the enol oxygen toward cis and trans (23) hexahydro-1H-
isochromenes.
1
The structure of compound 23 was assigned by standard spectroscopic techniques (IR, MS, H-
13
1
NMR, C-NMR, 2D NMR). It is worth underscoring some details of its H NMR like the upshielded
resonance of H-5ax as a q ( 0.59, J5ax-5eq-4a-6=12 Hz), due to the magnetic anisotropy of the double
bond (Δ3). Furthermore, the chemical shift assigned to H-4a (δ 1.55–1.68) seems to be a br t, where the
highest coupling constant is ca. 12 Hz. This is sufficiently consistent with both dihedral angles H4a–
C–C–H8a and H4a–C–C–H5ax of 180º, what are the corresponding angles of a trans-fused bicyclic
system in which the two hydrogen atoms of the junction carbons are both axial.
The aldol reaction of phenylacetaldehyde (15) with butanone, followed by acid dehydration, yielded
the α,β-unsaturated ketone 24 [42], along with the side product 25 [43,45], its positional isomer, and
26, the aldol-type self condensation of phenylacetaldehyde (Scheme 4). Regarding compound 26, the
spectroscopic data agree with those already reported [44].
Scheme 4. Synthesis of 24-26.
Reagents and conditions: (1) C2H5COCH3/KOH/MeOH, (2) p-TsOH/toluene.
In the synthesis of the α,β-unsaturated ketone 27, cis-dihydronopal (18) was reacted in a similar
way – aldol reaction with butanone followed by acid catalyzed dehydration. The crude obtained was
purified by flash chromatography to afford 27 in 56% yields. With respect to the spectroscopic data of

Molecules 2009, 14
2787
27, no dramatic changes occur either the C1–C5 moiety, with respect to the analogues19, 20, 22 and
24, or the 2-αH-pinane moiety, with respect to the precursors 17 and 18. A C’-2 epimer of 27 was
prepared by Mookherjee and co-workers and described as possessing a powerful sandalwood aroma
with urine [47], sweet and floral undertones. In this patent the inventors claimed its use for enhancing
the aroma or taste of smoking tobacco and tobacco articles.
2.1.3. Deconjugative -methylation of the -unsaturated ketones 19, 20, 22, 24 and 27 to give the
-unsaturated ketones 28–32
The ketones 19, 20, 22, 24 (+25) and 27 could be converted into the corresponding ,γ-unsaturated
ketones 28–32 by a deconjugative -methylation reaction [23,48,49]. This procedure relies on the
initial formation of an enolate, using a slight stoichiometric excess of potassium t-butoxide, followed
by the methylation of the resulting ion under conditions that provided the kinetically favoured product
in excess over the thermodynamically favoured product. A ten molar excess of cooled iodomethane
was added quickly over the cooled (0 ºC) solution of the referred enolate in DMF. The configuration
about the double bond in compounds 28–32 was E, as indicated, and the procedure provided those five
new enones, which after chromatographic purification yielded pure compounds 28 (77%), 29 (42%),
30 (55%), 31 (84%) [50] and 32 (85%).
2.1.4. Reduction of the -unsaturated ketones 28–32 with NaBH4 to give the alcohols 33–37
Finally, ,γ-unsaturated ketones 28–32 could be converted into the corresponding homoallylic
alcohols by reducing the carbonyl group with sodium borohydride under standard conditions. Although
other reducing agents were also tested [51], a mixture of sodium borohydride in methanol was
preferred because of economic considerations and easy handling. As expected, alcohols 33–37 were
obtained without any stereoselectivity on the new stereocentre C-2. After chromatographic purification
the target analogues to Polysantol® were obtained in good yields: 33 (62%), 34 (76%), 35 (90%), 36
(80%) and 37 (77%).
2.2. Odour evaluation
The independent odour evaluation of each bulky moiety-modified Polysantol® analogue 33–37
(each over 97% pure according to GC) was carried out by a group of perfumers using two different
protocols: (a) at three times from impregnated blotting paper strips (see section 3.6) (Table 1), (b) after
injecting them, separately, onto a GC fitted with sniffing port (Table 2).
Thus, the profile of the (E)-3,3-dimethyl-5-((1S,2S,5S)-6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl)pent-4-
en-2-ol (37) was identified as the most interesting and promising of the series because of it is full of
qualities and it directly emulates the natural sandalwood odour instead of that of synthetic Polysantol®.
For that reason, this compound has recently been claimed as a potential useful odorant [24].
Furthermore, it is noteworthy that 34 and 35 display fairly good behaviour as woody and sandalwood
odorants, a fact that supports the hypothesis that structurally rigid molecules interact with a smaller
number of olfactory receptor proteins than fairly flexible molecules, which can be assumed to interact
with the proteins involved in a more complex manner [52].

Molecules 2009, 14
Table 1. Odour evaluation of alcohols 33–37 from impregnated blotting paper strips.
2788
Odour
Compounds
Top notes
Heart notes
Base notes
Nuance of woody,
slightly damp in a
mixture between the
scent of fresh wood and
antique furniture
Turpentine, varnish and
woody with oriental
Slightly eastern woody,
not very intense
bottom, patchouli, humid
tar, smoky and earthy
Greasy, citrus and earthy-
green notes suitable with
a moist mushroom scent
Green and grassy
resembling to freshly
cut stalk of palms
Citronellic-type of citrus
odour with weak woody
Phenolic, dump, cresolic,
milky and sandela flavour
weak citrus odour
almost odourless
Cresolic, citrus on
citronella-type odours,
green, phenolic and
slightly exotic oriental
odour
Slight woody note with
flowery touch of roses,
but less intense
Imperceptible odour
(nearly odourless)
Solvent and woody note,
sandalwood-type alike to
the essential oil
Reminiscence of
sandalwood odour with
saffron touch
Sandal and sandela scent
Table 2. Odour evaluation of alcohols 33–37 using a GC fitted with sniffing port.
Compounds
Odour
Borneol, balsamic, camphoraceus woody notes, but not sandalwood. Also
fencholic, slightly valerianic with a note which remembers to wet mossy forest
soil at the end.
Woody notes with dryness and amber nuances Iso E Super-type. Also fatty,
green, floral and soapy notes, with an animalic and valerianic tone at the end.
Very clean and natural sandalwood note, Polysantol-type and as intense as this.
The woody bouquet is harmonized with amber, balsamic, animalic, sweet, green
and a slightly cresolic background.
Woody and mild sandalwood scent. It is also slightly greasy with burn, moist and
green nuances, and a reminiscent of citrus fruits at the end.
Very clean, intense and rounded sandalwood note, more natural scent than
Polysantol-type. It is also woody, vetiver, green in mossy-type, with animal and
vanilla notes at the end.

Molecules 2009, 14
2789
3. Experimental
3.1. General
Reactions were monitored by gas chromatography (GC) on a Varian CP-3800 gas chromatograph
fitted with a methyl silicone (CP-Sil 8 CB) capillary column (30 m  0.25 mm  0.25 m); carrier gas:
He; flow rate: 1 mL/min; oven temperature program: 50290 ºC at a rate of 8 ºC/min; injector
temperature: 250 ºC; flame ionization detector temperature: 300 ºC; retention times (tR) are expressed
in minutes. The reaction products were purified by conventional column chromatography (Merck silica
gel 60, 70230 mesh) or by flash chromatography (Scharlab silica gel 60, 230400 mesh), in both
1
cases using appropriate mixtures of hexane and Et2O. H-NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker
DPX 300 spectrometer (300 MHz, CDCl3, TMS) and a Bruker DPX 400 (400 MHz) spectrometer.
Chemical shift values are reported in parts per million (ppm,  scale) and coupling constants (J) are in
hertz (Hz). All described coupling constants refer to a three-bond coupling distance (3J). 13C-NMR
spectra were recorded on the same instruments (75 or 100 MHz, CDCl3, TMS). Chemical shifts are
also reported in ppm and carbon substitution degrees were established by DEPT multipulse sequence.
2D NMR experiments (DQF-COSY, HSQC, HMBC, NOESY) were carried out for all compounds of
dihydronopol series (17, 18, 27, 32, 37) and for the isochromene 23, on the same instrument. Infrared
(IR) spectra were recorder on a FT-IR Perkin-Elmer 1760X spectrometer using a thin film between
KBr plates (neat). Mass spectra (MS) were obtained in all cases by GCMS analysis carried out on a
Hewlett-Packard 5990 A II gas chromatograph coupled to a Hewlett-Packard 5989B mass
spectrometer using the electron impact (EI) ionization method (70 eV); the parameters for the GC unit
were the same as those described previously for the GC analyses. High-resolution mass spectra
(HRMS) were obtained on a trisector EBE Waters Micromass AutoSpect NT spectrometer using EI
(70 eV).
3.2. Starting materials
Isovaleraldehyde (3-methylbutanal, 12): Aldrich, 97% (GC); tR 2.26. Heptanal (13): Aldrich, 95%
(GC); tR 6.32. (±)-Citronellal (3,7-dimethyl-6-octenal, 14): Fluka, 90% (GC); tR 16.20. 2-Phenyl-
acetaldehyde (15): Fluka, 50% solution in diethylphthalate. To separate 2-phenylacetaldehyde (195 ºC,
1 atm), tR 11.40, from the non-volatile diethylphthalate (295 ºC, 1 atm) a vacuum distillation was
performed. (1S,2S,5S)-Dihydronopal (18) was obtained, as described below, from (1R)-(–)-nopol
[(1R)-2-(6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]-2-hepten-2-yl)ethanol, 16): Aldrich, 98% (GC); []25D = –31.8 (c
1.15, MeOH); tR 21.60.
(1S,2S,5S)-2-(6,6-Dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl)ethanol (17): a solution of the alkene 16 (250 mg,
1.5 mmol) in absolute MeOH (12.5 mL) was hydrogenated over PtO2 (23 mg) under the low-pressure
of a H2 gas filled balloon for 90 min. At this time the GC analysis indicated the hydrogenation was
complete and the catalyst being filtered off and washed with MeOH. The solvent was evaporated under
reduced pressure to afford 17 (227 mg, 90%) as a colourless oil; []25D = –22.1(c 1.25, MeOH); tR
24.65; IR (, cm-1): 3332 (OH), 2907 (cyclohexane), 1383 and 1366 (C(CH3)2); MS (m/z, %): 168 (M+,
+
1), 150 (M+H2O, 1), 135 (M+H2OMe, 5), 123 (M+C2H4OH, 14), 107 (C8H11 , 33); 1H-NMR (400

Molecules 2009, 14
2790
MHz): 3.65 (dt, J1A-1B=10.1, J1A-2A-2B=7.0, 1H, H-1A), 3.62 (dt, J1A-1B=10.1, J1A-2A-2B=7.0, 1H, H-
1B), 1.68 (q, J2-2’-1=7.0, 2H, H-2), 1.871.82 (m, 1H, CH-1’), 2.12 (ddq, J2’-3’a-2-=7.1, J2’-3’s=11.0, J2’-
1’=2.0, 1H, H-2’), 1.47 (ddt, J3’a-3’s=14.2, J3’a-2’-4’s=5.8, J3’a-4’a=11.1, 1H, H-3’a), 2.011.92 (m, 1H, H-
3’s), 1.891.82 (m, 1H, H-4’a), 1.971.90 (m, 1H, H-4’s), 1.911.87 (m, 1H, H-5’), 0.90 (d, J7’s-
7’a=9.5, 1H, H-7’s), 2.33 (ddt, J7’a-7’s=9.3, J7’a-4’a=2.0, J7’a-1’-5’=6.2, 1H, H-7’a), 1.19 (s, 3H, Me-6’),
13
1.01 (s, 3H, Me’-6’); C-NMR (100 MHz): 61.68 (C-1), 40.76 (C-2), 46.40 (C-1’), 37.48 (C-2’),
22.34 (C-3’), 26.43 (C-4’), 41.42 (C-5’), 38.69 (C-6’), 33.60 (C-7’), 28.16 (Me-6’), 23.22 (Me’-6’).
(1S,2S,5S)-6,6-Dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl-ethanal (18): a solution of dihydronopol (17, 907 mg,
5.4 mmol) in dry CH2Cl2 (8 mL) was added to a solution of PDC (3.05 g, 8.1 mmol) in CH2Cl2 (22
mL) at 25 ºC and stirred for 20 h under argon. Then, the mixture was diluted with diethylether–hexane,
filtered and the solvent evaporated under reduced pressure to afford 18 (672 mg, 75%) as a yellow-pale
oil, []25D = –19.3 (c 1.10, MeOH). The GC analysis (tR 21.44) indicated the conversion was complete.
IR (, cm-1): 2907 and 2713 (cyclohexane), 1725 (C=O), 1384 and 1367 (C(CH3)2); MS (m/z, %): 166
(M+, 1), 151 (M+Me, 9), 148 (M+H2O, 4), 133 (M+H2OMe, 12), 123 (M+CH2CHO, 27), 107
+
+
(C8H11 , 33), 79 (C6H7 , 82); 1H-NMR (400 MHz): 0.90 (d, J7’s-7’a=9.8, 1H, H-7’s), 0.95 (s, 3H, Me-
6’), 1.12 (s, 3H, Me’-6’), 1.37 (m, 1H, H-3’a), 1.99 (ddt, J3’s-3’a=14.6, J3’s-4’a=3.0, J3’s-4’s-2’=10.4, 1H,
H-3’s), 1.741.79 (m, 1H, H-1’), 1.731.92 (m, 2H, H-4’), 1.911.89 (m, 1H, H-5’), 2.28 (ddt, J7’a-
7’s=9.3, J7’a-4’a=2.0, J7’a-1’-5’=6.0, 1H, H-7’a), 2.44 (ddd, J2A-1=2.0, J2A-2B=16.3, J2A-2’=7.3, 1H, H-2A),
2.47 (ddd, J2B-1=2.0, J2A-2B=16.3, J2B-2’=7.3, 1H, H-2B), 2.58 (ddt, J2’-2=7.3, J2’-3’s=17.1, J2’-1’=2.3, 1H,
13
H2-2’); C-NMR (100 MHz): 202.54 (C-1), 51.81 (C-2), 46.11 (C-1’), 34.83 (C-2’), 21.83 (C-3’),
25.95 (C-4’), 40.89 (C-5’), 38.46 (C-6’), 33.20 (C-7’), 27.73 (Me-6’), 22.96 (Me’-6’).
3.3. Aldol condensation of 1215 and 18 with butanone to give 19, 20, 22, 24 and 27
(a) With subsequent acidic catalyzed dehydration: a 6.0 M solution of starting aldehydes (1215
and 18) in MeOH (1.0 mL, 6.0 mmol) was added dropwise to a stirred solution of butanone (1.73 g,
24.0 mmol) and KOH (15 mg, 0.25 mmol) in MeOH (1.5 mL) at 0 ºC for 1 h. Then, the mixture was
allowed to warm to room temperature and stirring was continued for a further 8 h. The reaction was
quenched with a 1N aqueous solution of AcOH (100 mL), the solvent was then partially evaporated in
vacuo and the resulting crude diluted with Et2O (25 mL) and washed with 1 N AcOH solution (25 mL)
and brine (3×25 mL). The crude was dried over anhyd Na2SO4 and evaporated to yield a yellow
residue, which was used in the next reaction without further purification. Then, a DeanStark
apparatus was fitted to a flask containing a solution of the above aldol crude reaction and TsOH·H2O
(40 mg, 0.2 mmol) in dry toluene (10 mL), and the mixture was refluxed for 90 min. The solution was
allowed to cool down and washed with an aqueous saturated NaHCO3 solution (3×25 mL), 1N AcOH
solution (25 mL) and brine (3×25 mL), dried over anhyd Na2SO4 and evaporated in vacuo. The aldol
condensations of butanone (a) with 12 afforded (E)-3,6-dimethylhept-3-en-2-one (19) in a 88% yield,
(b) with 13 afforded (E)-3-methyldec-3-en-2-one (20) and (Z)-2-pentylnon-2-enal (21) in 71% and
24% yields, respectively, (c) with 14 afforded 1,1,3,4,6-pentamethyl-4a,5,6,7,8,8a-hexahydro-1H-
isochromene (23) in a 91% yield, (d) with 15 afforded (E)-3-methyl-5-phenylpent-3-en-2-one (24) and
its isomer (E)-3-methyl-5-phenylpent-4-en-2-one (25) in a 62% yield (24:25, 4:1) and (E)-2,4-

Molecules 2009, 14
2791
diphenylbut-2-enal (26) in a 17% yield and (e) with 18 afforded (E)-3-methyl-5-((1S,2S,5S)-6,6-
dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl)pent-3-en-2-one (27) in a 56% yield.
(b) With subsequent basic catalyzed dehydration: a solution of 14 (2.0 g, 12.9 mmol) in MeOH (4.0
mL) was added dropwise to a stirred solution of butanone (3.74 g, 51.9 mmol) and KOH (30 mg, 0.5
mmol) in MeOH (2.0 mL) at 0 ºC for 1 h. Then, the mixture was allowed to warm to room temperature
and stirring was continued for a further 8 h. A condenser was then fitted to the flask and the mixture
heated at ca. 50 ºC for 2 h. The solution was allowed to reach room temperature and quenched with 1N
AcOH solution (25 mL). The mixture was extracted with Et2O (3×25 mL), and the combined organic
extracts were neutralized by washing with brine (3×25 mL). The crude was dried over anhyd Na2SO4
and evaporated in vacuo to afford (E)-3,6,10-trimethylundeca-3,9-dien-2-one (22) in a 52% yield.
(E)-3,6-Dimethylhept-3-en-2-one (19): colourless oil; tR 12.42; IR (, cm-1): 1671 and 1642 (,-
unsaturated C=O), 1466 (-CH2-C=C-) and 1433 (CH3-C=C-); MS (m/z, %) 140 (M+, 14), 125 (M+Me,
+
1
22), 97 (M+[Me-C=O], 12), 83 (CH3-CO-CH-CH3 , 62), 69 (20), 55 (65), 43 (Me-C=O+, 100); H-
NMR (300 MHz): 0.96 (d, J=6.6, 6H, H-7 and Me-6), 1.76 (br s, 3H, Me-3), 1.79 (n, J=6.7, 1H, H-
6), 2.14 (t, J=7.1, 2H, H-5), 2.31 (s, 3H, H-1), 6.66 (tq, J1=7.4, J2=1.4, 1H, H-4); 13C NMR (75 Hz):
11.03 (Me-3), 22.28 (C-7, Me-6), 25.20 (C-1), 28.20 (C-6), 37.97 (C-5), 137.98 (C-3), 142.47 (C-4),
199.54 (C-2).
(E)-3-Methyldec-3-en-2-one (20): the crude reaction mixture (20+21) was purified by flash
chromatography (eluent: n-hexane/Et2O 95:5) to yield 20 as a yellow-pale oil; tR 22.98. IR (, cm-1):
1671 and 1642 (,-unsaturated C=O), 1460 (-CH2-C=C-); MS (m/z, %): 168 (M+, 2), 153 (M+Me,
8), 125 ( M+[Me-C=O], 7), 111 (M+[CH3-(CH2)3-], 4), 85 (M+[Me-CO-C(Me)=CH], 14), 83
(M+[CH3-(CH2)5-], 16), 69 (33), 55 (40), 43 (Me-C=O+, 100); 1H-NMR (300 MHz): 0.90 (t, J=6.7,
3H, H-10), 1.25–1.36 (m, 4H, H-7, H-8), 1.42–1.50 (m, 4H, H-6, H-9), 1.76 (br s, 3H, Me-3), 2.24 (q,
J=7.3, 2H, H-5), 2.31 (s, 3H, H-1), 6.64 (tq, J1=7.3, J2=1.3, 1H, H-4); 13C-NMR (75 MHz): 11.02
(Me-3), 13.98 (C-10), 22.50 (C-9), 25.34 (C-1), 28.54 (C-5), 29.03 (C-7), 29.09 (C-6), 31.57 (C-8),
137.48 (C-3), 143.97 (C-4), 199.91 (C-2).
1,1,3,4,6-Pentamethyl-4a,5,6,7,8,8a-hexahydro-1H-isochromene (23): the crude reaction product was
purified by flash chromatography (eluent: n-hexane) to yield 23 as a colourless oil; tR 26.00; IR (,
cm-1): 1738, 1715, 1677, 1456; MS (m/z, %): 208 (M+, 22), 193 (M+Me, 8), 190 (M+H2O, 1), 175
(M+MeH2O, 2), 165 (M+[O-C(Me)], 27), 150 (M+[O-C(Me)]Me, 7), 137 ((M++1)[O-
+
+
+
C(Me)=C(Me)], 12), 123 (24), 109 (38), 95 (18), 83 (C6H11 , 10), 81 (C6H9 , 20), 69 (C5H9 , 28), 55
([C-O-C(Me)]+, 37), 43 ([O-C(Me)]+, 100), 41 (74); H-NMR (300 MHz): 0.59 (q, J5ax-5eq-4a-6=12,
1
1H, H-5ax), 0.801.00 (m, 1H, H-7ax), 0.911.00 (m, 1H, H-8ax), 0.92 (d, J=6.6, 3H, Me-6), 1.00 (s,
3H, Meax-1), 1.121.22 (m, 1H, H-8a), 1.22 (s, 3H, Meeq-1), 1.331.46 (m, 1H, H-6), 1.53 (br s, 3H,
Me-4), 1.551.68 (m, 1H, H-4a), 1.631.72 (m, 1H, H-8eq), 1.631.72 (m, 1H, H-7eq), 1.71 (br s, 3H,
Me-3), 1.982.05 (m, 1H, H-5eq); 13C-NMR (75 MHz): 14.05 (Me-4), 17.22 (Me-3), 19.20 (Meax-1),
22.64 (Me-6), 27.68 (Meeq-1), 27.74 (C-8), 32.77 (C-6), 35.32 (C-7), 38.37 (C-4a), 38.75 (C-5), 48.47
(C-8a), 75.40 (C-1), 103.15 (C-4), 141.75 (C-3).

Molecules 2009, 14
2792
(E)-3,6,10-Trimethylundeca-3,9-dien-2-one (22): the crude reaction product was purified by flash
chromatography (eluent: n-hexane/Et2O 95:5) to yield 22 as a yellow-pale oil; tR 28.69; IR (, cm-1):
1672 and 1642 (α,β-unsaturated C=O), 14551439 (CH3-C=C-); MS (m/z, %): 208 (M+, 1), 193
(M+Me, 3), 165 (M+[Me-C=O], 9), 150 (3), 136 (5), 125 ([(Me)2C=CH-(CH2)2-CH(Me)-CH2-]+, 9),
123 (14), 109 (26), 97 ([-CH2-CH=C(Me)-CO-Me]+, 3), 95 (10), 83 ([(Me)2C=CH-(CH2)2-]+,
[CH=C(Me)-CO-Me]+, 11), 81 (12), 69 ([(Me)2C=C-CH2-]+, 52), 55 ([(Me)2C=CH-]+, 30), 43 (Me-
C=O+, 94), 41 (100); 1H-NMR (300 MHz): 0.93 (d, J=6.6, 3H, Me-6), 1.18–1,42 (m, 2H, H-7), 1.34–
1.64 (m, 1H, H-6), 1.61 (br s, 3H, Me-10), 1.69 (br s, 3H, H-11), 1.77 (br s, 3H, Me-3), 1.90–2.28 (m,
4H, H-5, H-8), 2.31 (s, 3H, H-1), 5.09 (br t, J=7.0, 1H, H-9), 6.66 (br t, J=7.4, 1H, H-4); 13C-NMR (75
MHz): 11.20 (Me-3), 17.54 (Me-10), 19.59 (Me-6), 25.35 (C-1), 25.47 (C-8), 25.61 (C-11), 32.66
(C-6), 36.29 (C-7), 36.82 (C-5), 124.31 (C-9), 131.37 (C-10), 138.15 (C-3), 142.66 C-4), 199.70 (C-2).
(E)-3-Methyl-5-phenylpent-3-en-2-one (24) and (E)-3-methyl-5-phenylpent-4-en-2-one (25): the crude
reaction product was purified by vacuum distillation (60 ºC, 0.08 Torr) to yield a 4:1 mixture of 24 and
25 as a brown oil; tR 29.80 (24) and 28.76 (25); IR (, cm-1): 3084, 3060, 3027 (C=C, Ar), 1694
(CH3COCH(CH3)C), 1694 and 1667 (C=C(CH3)COCH3), 1452 (CH2C=C); MS (m/z, %) of 24: 175
+
+
(M++1, 11), 174 (M+, 9), 159 (M+–Me, 29), 131 (M+–MeCO, 100), 91 (C7H7 , 99), 77 (C6H5 , 12). MS
(m/z, %) of 25: 174 (M+, 9), 131 (M+–MeCO, 100), 116 (M+–MeCO−Me, 15), 91 (C7H7 , 46), 77
(C6H5 , 8); 1H-NMR (400 MHz): 1.27 (d, JMe-3-3=7, 3H, Me-C-3, 25), 1.89 (d, JMe-3-4=1.2, 3H, Me-C-
+
+
3, 24), 2.19 (s, 3H, Me-1, 25), 2.30 (s, 3H, Me-1, 24), 3.35 (q, J3-4-Me-3=7.5, 1H, H-3, 25), 3.59 (d, J4-
5=7.5, 2H, H-5, 24), 3.59 (d, J4-5=7.5, 2H, H-4, 25), 6.52 (d, J5-4=15.9, 1H, H-5, 25), 6.76 (tq, J4-5=7.2,
13
J4-Me-3=1.2, 1H, H-4, 24), 7.15−7.50 (m, 5H, Ph, 24 and 25); C-NMR (100 MHz): 11.34 (Me-C3,
24), 25.51 (C-1, 24), 35.36 (C-5, 24), 127.64 (C-4’,24), 128.48 (C-5’ and -3’, 24), 128.76 (C-2’ and -
6’, 24), 138.07 (C-3, 24), 138.92 (C-1’, 24), 141.49 (C-4, 24), 199.79 (C-2, 24); 16.15 (Me-3, 25),
28.14 (C-1, 25), 51.34 (C-3, 25), 126.24 (C-5’ and -3’, 25), 127.46 (C-4’,25), 128.48 (C-2’ and -6’,
25), 128.74 (C-4, 25), 132.15 (C-5, 25), 135.81 (C-1’, 25), 208.08 (C-2, 25).
(E)-3-Methyl-5-((1S,2S,5S)-6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl)pent-3-en-2-one (27): the crude
reaction product was purified by flash chromatography (eluent: n-hexane/Et2O 4:1) to yield 27 as a
colourless oil; []25D = –16.3 (c 1.35, MeOH); tR 38.06; IR (, cm-1): 2982 and 2907 (cyclohexane),
1669 and 1641 (CH=C(CH3)COCH3), 1468 and 1431 (CH=CCH3), 1365 and 1387 (C(CH3)2); MS
(m/z, %): 220 (M+, 1), 205 (M+−Me, 9), 177 (M+−Me−CO, 13), 137 (M+−CH=C(CH3)COCH3, 7), 123
+
1
(M+ −CH2CH=C(CH3)COCH3, 27), 83 (CH=C(CH3)COCH3 , 20), 43 (CH3CO+, 86); H-NMR (400
MHz): 0.89 (d, J7’s-7’a=9.0, 1H, H-7’s), 1.07 (s, 3H, CH3-9’), 1.19 (s, 3H, CH3-8), 1.50 (ddt, J3’a-
3’s=14.5, J3’a-4’a=11.5, J3’a-4’s-2’=5.9, 1H, H-3’a), 1.76 (q, JMe-3-4=1.1, 3H, CH3-3), 1.88–1.82 (m, 1H, H-
1’), 1.95–1.89(m, 1H, H-2’), 1.91–1.85 (m, 1H, H-4’a), 2.00–1.91 (m, 1H, H-4’s), 2.04–1.93 (m, 1H,
H-3’s), 2.19 (ddt, J5’-1’=2.0, J5’-7’a=2.6, J5’-4’s-4’a=7.4, 1H, H-5’), 2.29 (s, 3H, CH3-1), 2.39–2.32 (m, 1H,
13
H-7’a), 2.35–2.30 (m, 2H, H-5), 6.62 (tq, J4-5=7.3 and J4–Me-3=1.3, 1H, H-4); C-NMR (100 MHz):
11.36 (Me-C-3), 22.28 (C-3’), 23.18 (Me-9’), 25.43 (C-1), 26.36 (C-4’), 28.12 (Me-8’), 33.81 (C-7’),
36.78 (C-5), 38.71 (C-6’), 41.13 (C-5’), 41.33 (C-2’), 45.79 (C-1’), 137.83 (C-3), 143.41 (C-4), 199.92
(C-2).

Molecules 2009, 14
2793
3.4. Deconjugative α-methylation of 19, 20, 22, 24 and 27 to give 2832
A solution of the appropriate α,β-unsaturated ketone [19, 20, 22, 24 (+25) or 27] (60.5 mmol) in dry
DMF (4 mL) was added dropwise to a stirred solution of KtBuO (6.98 g, 61.0 mmol) in dry DMF (30
mL) at room temperature for 30 min. After the addition was completed, the reaction was stirred for 10
min and then cooled to 0 ºC. Pre-cooled MeI (22.81 g, 160.7 mmol) was added quickly and the
reaction mixture stirred at that temperature for 10 min and then allowed to warm to room temperature.
Brine (10 mL) and 1N AcOH solution (10 mL) were added and the crude was extracted with
hexane/Et2O 1:1 (75 mL). The resulting organic solution was washed with 1N AcOH solution (2×30
mL) and brine (3×30 mL), dried over anhyd Na2SO4 and evaporated under reduced pressure to afford
crude -unsaturated ketones 28–32, which were all purified by flash chromatography (eluent:
hexane/Et2O). The deconjugative -methylation reaction (a) of 19 afforded (E)-3,3,6-trimethylhept-4-
en-2-one (28) in a 77% yield, (b) of 20 afforded (E)-3,3-dimethyldec-4-en-2-one (29) in a 42% yield,
(c) of 22 afforded (E)-3,3,6,10-tetramethylundeca-4,9-dien-2-one (30) in a 55% yield, (d) of a 4:1
mixture of 24 and 25 afforded (E)-3,3-dimethyl-5-phenylpent-4-en-2-one (31) in a 84% yield, and (e)
of 27 afforded (E)-3,3-dimethyl-5-((1S,2S,5S)-6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl)pent-4-en-2-one
(32) in a 85% yield.
(E)-3,3,6-Trimethylhept-4-en-2-one (28): yellow-pale oil; IR (, cm-1): 1712 (C=O), 1672 (H-C=C-H)
and 1467 (-CH-C=C-C-); MS (m/z, %): 154 (M+, 1), 111(M+C(CH3)2, 51), 69 ((CH3)2CH-CH=CH-+,
1
100), 55 ((CH3)2CH-C-+, 46), 43 (CH3-C=O+, 51); H-NMR (300 MHz): 0.98 (d, J=6.9, 6H, Me-7
and Me-C6), 1.20 (s, 6H, 2 Me-C3), 2.09 (s, 3H, Me-1), 2.29 (o, J=6.3, 1H, H-6), 5.42 (d, J4-5=15.7,
1H, H-4), 5.50 (dd, J5-4=15.8, J5-6=5.6, 1H, H-5); 13C-NMR (75 MHz): 22.35 (2 Me-C3), 24.01 (C-7
and Me-C6), 25.21 (C-1), 31.16 (C-6), 49.85 (C-3), 131.33 (C-5), 137.48 (C-4), 211.92 (C-2).
(E)-3,3-Dimethyldec-4-en-2-one (29): yellow-pale oil; IR (, cm-1): 1713 (C=O) and 1467 (-CH-
CH=CH-C-); MS (m/z, %): 182 (M+, 1), 167 (M+Me, 1), 139 (M+Me-C=O, 17), 97 (CH3-(CH2)4-
CH-+, 8), 85 (Me-CO-C(Me)2-+, 1), 83 (33), 69 (100), 57 (CH3-(CH2)-+, 4), 55 (28), 43 (Me-C=O+);
1H-NMR (300 MHz): 0.89 (t, J=6.9, 3H, Me-10), 1.20 (s, 6H, 2 Me-C3), 1.22–1.41 (m, 6H, H-7, H-
8, H-9), 2.03 (q, J=6.5, 2H, H-6), 2.10 (s, 3H, Me-1), 5.46 (d, J=15.6, 1H, H-4), 5.55 (dd, J5-4=6.0, J5-
13
6=15.6, 1H, H-5); C-NMR (75 MHz): 13.88 (C-10), 22.42 (C-9), 23.99 (2 Me-C-3), 25.27 (C-1),
28.94 (C-7), 31.28 (C-8), 32.62 (C-6), 50.06 (C-3), 130.53 (C-5), 134.16 (C-4), 211.92 (C-2).
(E)-3,3,6,10-Tetramethylundeca-4,9-dien-2-one (30): yellow-pale oil; IR (, cm-1): 1712 (C=O), 1677
and 1628 (C=C), 1455 (-CH-C=C-C-); MS (m/z, %): 222 (M+, 1), 207 (M+Me, 1), 179 (M+Me-C=O,
5), 137 (M+(Me)2C-CO-Me, 2), 124 ((Me)2-C=C-(CH2)2-CH(Me)-CH+, 3), 123 (13), 109 ((Me)2-
+
C=CH-(CH2)2-CH(Me)-CH+Me, 23), 95 (12), 83 ((Me)2-C=CH-(CH2)2 , 32), 69 ((Me)2-C=CH-
+
CH2 ,100), 55 ((Me)2-C=CH+, 21), 43 (Me-C=O+, 54); 1H-NMR (300 MHz): 0.90 (d, J=6.6, 3H, Me-
C-6), 1.13 (s, 6H, 2 Me-C-3), 1.17–1.29 (m, 2H, H-7), 1.51 (br s, 3H, Me-11), 1.61 (br s, 3H, Me-C-
10), 1.83 (q, 2H, H-8), 2.03 (s, 3H, Me-1), 2.40 (q, J=7.4, 1H, H-6), 5.01 (br t, J=7.1, 1H, H-9), 5.30
(dd, J5-4=15.7, J5-6=6.8, 1H, H-5), 5.38 (d, J=15.7, 1H, H-4); 13C-NMR (75 MHz): 17.62 (C-11),

Molecules 2009, 14
2794
20.63 (Me-C-6), 24.05 and 24.12 (2 Me-C-3), 25.30 (C-1), 25.57 (Me-C-10), 25.80 (C-8), 36.56 (C-6),
37.06 (C-7), 50.02 (C-3), 124.47 (C-9), 131.31 (C-10), 132.77 (C-5), 136.27 (C-4), 211.86 (C-2).
(E)-3,3-Dimethyl-5-phenylpent-4-en-2-one (31): brown oil; IR (, cm-1): 3082, 3059 and 3026 (C=C,
Ar), 1690 (CH3COC(CH3)2), 1679 and 971 (HC=CH), 1363 and 1363 (C(CH3)2), 749 and 694 (Ph);
MS (m/z, %): 188 (M+, 1), 173 (M+–CH3, 1), 145 (M+−CH3CO, 30), 131 (M+−Me−CH3CO, 5), 91
+
+
1
(C7H7 , 99), 77 (C6H5 , 4), 43 (CH3CO+, 12), 28 (CO+, 100); H-NMR (400 MHz): 1.32 (s, 6H,
2CH3-C-3), 2.13 (s, 3H, Me-1), 6.26 (d, J4-5=16.2, 1H, H-4), 6.45 (d, J5-4=16.3, 1H, H-5), 7.21 (tt, J4’-3’-
5’=7.2, J4’-2’-6’=1.5, 1H, H-4’), 7.29 (t, J3’-2’-4’=7.3, 2H, H-3’ and 5’), 7.35 (dd, J2’-3’/6’-5’=7.1, J2’-4’/6’-
4’=1.3, 2H, H-2’ and 6’); 13C-NMR (100 MHz): 23.91 (2CH3-C-3), 25.46 (C-1), 50.36 (C-3), 126.18
(C-2’ and C-6’), 127.47 (C-4), 128.48 (C-3’ and C-5’), 129.29 (C-4’), 133.99 (C-5), 136.85 (C-1’),
210.60 (C-2).
(E)-3,3-Dimethyl-5-((1S,2S,5S)-6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl)pent-4-en-2-one (32): yellow-pale
oil; []25 = –22.3 (c 1.15, MeOH); Rt 35.85; IR (, cm-1): 2939 and 2909 (cyclohexane), 1710
D
(CH3COC(CH3)2), 1672 and 972 (HC=CH), 1383 and 1364 (C(CH3)2). MS (m/z, %): 234 (M+, 1), 219
+
(M+–Me, 1), 191 (M+−CH3CO, 23), 149 (M+−CH3COC(CH3)2, 15), 93 (C7H9 , 3), 69
+
1
(CH3COCHCH3 , 100), 43 (CH3CO+, 77); H-NMR (400 MHz): 2.08 (s, 3H, Me-1), 5.37 (dd, J4-
5=15.8, J4-2´=1.6, 1H, H-4), 5.67 (dd, J5-4=15.8, J5-2’=6.8, 1H, H-5), 1.91–1.99 (m, 1H, CH-1’), 2.73
(ddddd, J2’-3’s=10.5, J2’-5 =6.8, J2’-1’=6.0, J2’-3’a =2.5, J2’-4=1.7, 1H, H-2’), 1.60 (dddd, J3’a-3’s=15.3, J3’a-
4’a=10.5, J3’a-2’=6.0, J3’a-4’s=4.5, 1H, H-3’a), 1.93–2.02 (m, 1H, H-3’s), 1.81–1.92 (m, 1H, H-4’a), 1.92–
2.00 (m, 1H, H-4’s), 1.86–1.96 (m, 1H, H-5’), 0.99 (d, J7’s-7’a=9.7, 1H, H-7’s), 2.32 (dddd, J7’s-7’a=9.7,
J7’s-1’=6.6, J7’s-5’=5.7, J7’s-4’a=1.6, 1H, H-7’a), 1.19 (s, 3H, Me-8), 0.95 (s, 3H, Me-9), 1.19 (s, 6H,
2CH3-C-3); 13C-NMR (100 MHz): 21.42 (C-3’), 23.53 (Me-9’), 24.03 (2CH3-C-3), 25.35 (C-1),
26.00 (C-4’), 27.83 (Me-8’), 32.31 (C-7’), 38.53 (C-6’),41.08 (C-5’), 43.34 (C-2’), 46.99 (C-1’), 49.96
(C-3), 132.09 (C-4), 137.15 (C-5), 211.80 (C-2).
3.5. Reduction of 2832 with NaBH4 to give 33–37
Solid NaBH4 (2.77 g, 71.8 mmol) was added portionwise to a stirred solution of starting -
unsaturated ketone 28–32 (54.7 mmol) in MeOH (50 mL) at 0 ºC. After 15 min the reaction was
allowed to warm to rt and left to react for 45 min. Then, the solvent was partially evaporated under
reduced pressure and the resulting suspension was diluted with hexane/Et2O 1:2 (75 mL), cooled again
to 0 ºC and neutralized with 1N AcOH solution. The organic layer was washed again with 1N AcOH
solution (50 mL) and brine (3 × 50 mL), then dried over anhyd Na2SO4 and the solvent evaporated in
vacuo to yield crude alcohols 33–37, which were purified by flash chromatography (eluent:
hexane/Et2O). The reduction with NaBH4 (a) of 28 afforded (E)-3,3,6-trimethylhept-4-en-2-ol (33) in a
62% yield, (b) of 29 afforded (E)-3,3-dimethyldec-4-en-2-ol (34) in a 76% yield, (c) of 30 afforded
(E)-3,3,6,10-tetramethylundeca-4,9-dien-2-ol (35) in a 90% yield, (d) of 31 afforded (E)-3,3-dimethyl-
5-phenylpent-4-en-2-ol (36) in a 80% yield, and (e) of 32 afforded (E)-3,3-dimethyl-5-((1S,2S,5S)-6,6-
dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl)pent-4-en-2-ol (37) in a 77% yield.

Molecules 2009, 14
2795
(E)-3,3,6-Trimethylhept-4-en-2-ol (33): yellow-pale oil; tR 11.62; IR (, cm-1): 3684 (OH), 1466 (CH-
C=C-C); MS (m/z, %): 142 (M+14, 1), 127 (1), 123 (M+Me–H2O, 1), 113 (M+(CH3)2CH, 2), 112
1
(25), 69 ((CH3)2CH-CH=CH+, 100), 56 ((CH3)2CH-CH=C+, 22), 55 (34), 43 ((CH3)2CH+, 38); H-
NMR (300 MHz): 0.97 (s, 6H, 2CH3-C-3), 0.99 (d, J=6.6, 6H, Me-7 and Me-C-6), 1.09 (d, J=6.3,
3H, Me-1), 2.28 (o, J=6.7, 1H, H-6), 3.46 (q, J=6.4, 1H, H-2), 5.34 (d, J4-5=15.7, 1H, H-4), 5.43 (dd,
J5-4=15.7, J5-6=6.2, 1H, H-5); 13C-NMR (75 MHz): 17.24 (C-1), 21.78*a (Me-C-3), 22.79*b (Me-C-
6), 22.81*b (Me-7), 24.03*a (Me’-C-3), 31.35 (C-6), 40.44 (C-3), 74.13 (C-2), 133.55 (C-5), 136.98 (C-
4) (*these signals may be interchanged); HRMS m/z, calcd. for C10H20O, 156.1514 (M+),
found 156.1467.
(E)-3,3-Dimethyldec-4-en-2-ol (34): yellow-pale oil; tR 22.25; IR (, cm-1): 38413400 (OH), 1467
(CH2-CH=CH); MS (m/z, %): 169 (M+Me, 1), 167 (M+OH, 1), 140 (13), 139 (Me-CH-OH+, 3), 125
(4), 112 (5), 97 (CH3-(CH2)4-CH=CH+, 11), 83 (31), 69 (100), 55 (34), 43 (27), 41 (50); 1H-NMR (300
MHz): 0.89 (t, J=6.5, 3H, Me-10), 0.97 (s, 6H, 2Me-C-3), 1.09 (d, J=6.3, 3H, Me-1), 1.25–1.44 (m,
6H, H-7, H-8, H-9), 2.02 (q, J=6.6, 2H, H-6), 3.46 (q, J=6.2, 1H, CH-2), 5.38 (d, J4-5=15.9, 1H, H-4),
5.47 (dd, J5-6=6.1, J5-4=15.7, 1H, H-5); 13C-NMR (75 MHz): 14.02 (C-10), 17.24 (C-1), 21.73*a (Me-
C-3), 22.47 (C-9), 24.03*a (Me-C-3), 29.30 (C-7), 31.36*b (C-8), 32.83*b (C-6), 40.68 (C-3), 74.11 (C-
2), 129.83 (C-5), 136.57 (C-4) (*these signals may be interchanged); HRMS m/z, calcd. for C12H20O,
184.1827 (M+), found 184.1183.
(E)-3,3,6,10-Tetramethylundeca-4,9-dien-2-ol (35): yellow-pale oil; tR 31.25; IR (, cm-1): 3430 (OH)
and 1455 (CH2-CH=CH); MS (m/z, %): 180 ((M++1)[Me-CH-OH], 1), 137 (M+[(Me)2C-CHOH-
Me], 8), 123 (19), 109 ([(Me)2-C=CH-(CH2)2-CH(Me)-CH]+Me, 50), 95 (21), 83 ([(Me)2-C=CH-
1
(CH2)2]+, 29), 69 ([(Me)2-C=CH-CH2]+,100), 55 ([(Me)2-C=CH]+, 30), 45 (54); H-NMR (300 MHz):
0.96–0.98 (m, 3H, Me-C-6), 0.98 (s, 6H, 2 Me-3), 1.09 (d, J=6.5, 3H, Me-1), 1.29 (q, J=7.4, 2H,
CH2-7), 1.58 (br s, 3H, Me-C-10), 1.68 (br s, 3H, Me-11), 1.93 (q, J= 7.6, 2H, CH2-8), 2.11 (m, J=6.8,
1H, CH-6), 3.46 (q, J=6.2, 1H, CH-2), 5.09 (br t, J=7.2, 1H, CH-9), 5.29 (dd, J1=16.0, J2= 6.6, 1H,
CH-5), 5.36 (d, J=15.6, 1H, CH-4); 13C-NMR (75 MHz): 17.28 (C-1), 17.62 (C-11), 21.04 (Me-C6),
21.97 (Me-C3), 23.98 (Me’-C3), 25.67 (Me-C10), 25.89 (C-8), 36.72 (C-6), 37.26 (C-7), 40.59 (C-3),
74.13 (C-2), 124.59 (C-9), 131.19 (C-10), 135.00 (C-5), 135.58 (C-4); HRMS m/z, calcd. for C15H28O,
224.2140 (M+), found 224.2157.
(E)-3,3-Dimethyl-5-phenylpent-4-en-2-ol (36): yellow oil; tR 32.30; IR (, cm-1): 3406, 1093, 1071
1
(OH); 1383 (C(CH3)2); 1646, 972 (CH=CH). 1945, 1875, 1802, 911, 748, 693 (Ph); H-NMR (400
MHz): 1.10 (s, 6H, 2Me-C-3), 1.13 (d, J=6.4, 3H, Me-1), 3.58 (q, J=6.3, 1H, H-2), 6.22 (d, J4-5=16.3,
1H, H-4), 6.39 (d, J5-4=16.3, 1H, H-5), 7.19 (tt, J4’-3’-5’=7.2 and J4’-2’-6’=0.9, 1H, H-4’), 7.28 (dt, J3’-2’-
13
4’=7.4 and J3’-5’=1.5, 2H, H-3’ and H-5’), 7.36 (br d, J2’-3’=7.4H, 2H, H-2’ and H-6’); C-NMR (100
MHz): 17.75 (C-1), 22.27 and 23.56 (2 M-C-3), 41.23 (C-3), 74.44 (C-2), 126.08 (C-2’ and C-6’),
127.08 (C-4), 128.41 (C-4’), 128.45 (C-3’ and C-5’), 136.94 (C-5), 137.48 (C-1’); HRMS m/z, calcd.
for C13H18O, 190.1358 (M+), found 190.1345.

Molecules 2009, 14
2796
(E)-3,3-Dimethyl-5-((1S,2S,5S)-6,6-dimethylbicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-yl)pent-4-en-2-ol (37): yellow-pale
oil; []25D = −20.9 (c 0.85, MeOH); tR 36.70; IR (, cm-1): 3475–3300 (OH), 1090, 1069 (CH-OH),
1384, 1366 (C(CH3)2); 1654, 975 (CH=CH); 1H-NMR (400 MHz): 1.08 (d, J=6.4, 3H, H-1), 3.46 (q,
J=6.4, 1H, H-2), 5.29 (dd, J4-5=15.8 and J 4-2´=1.5, 1H, H-4), 5.62 (dd, J5-4=15.8, J5-2’=7.0, 1H, H-5),
1.89–1.99 (m, 1H, H-1’), 2.73 (dtt, J2’-1’-4=1.1, J2’-3’a-5=6.0, J2’-3’s=11.8 1H, H-2’), 1.61 (ddt, J3’a-4’a=5.6,
J3’a-3’s=10.2, J3’a-2’-4’s=10.0, 1H, H-3’a), 1.93–2.03 (m, 1H, H-3’s), 1.81–1.92 (m, 1H, H-4’a), 1.92–
1.99 (m, 1H, H-4’s), 1.86–1.97 (m, 1H, H-5’), 0.99 (d, J7’s-7’a=9.9, 1H, H-7’s), 2.32 (dt, J7’s-7’a=8.8, J7’a-
1’-5’=6.1, 1H, H-7’a), 1.19 (s, 3H, Mes-C-6), 0.97 (s, 3H, Mes-C-6), 0.97 (s, 3H, Me-C-3), 0.96 (s, 3H,
13
Me’-C-3); C-NMR (100 MHz): 17.25 (C-1), 21.69 and 21.74 (Me’-C-3), 21.82 and 21.77 (C-3’),
23.59 (Me-9), 24.03 (Me-C-3), 26.09 (C-4’), 27.90 (Me-8), 32.43 (C-7’), 38.58 (C-6’), 40.54 (C-3),
41.13 (C-5’), 43.60 (C-2’), 47.48 and 47.35 (C-1’), 74.21 and 74.18 (C-2), 134.46 (C-4), 136.74 (C-5);
HRMS m/z, calcd. for C16H28O, 236.2140 (M+), found 236.1993.
3.6. Sensory evaluation
Direct smelling analysis. Blotting paper strips were impregnated with compounds 33–37, previously
diluted with Et2O (25 mg/200 L), and smelt by perfumers at that moment (after solvent evaporation),
3 h and 24 h later. The olfactory description in each session therefore corresponded to the top, heart
and base notes, respectively.
GC sniffing analysis. Odour assessment of compounds 33–37 was achieved by a group of perfumers
using a Hewlett-Packard Model 5890 Series II gas chromatograph equipped with a thermal
conductivity detector (TCD) and handmade sniffing port. Separation was done with a 10% Carbowax
20M over Chromosorb W/AW 80100 mesh packed column (1.8 m×6 mm OD×2.2 mm ID); injector
temperature: 250 ºC; detector temperature: 250 ºC, oven temperature program: 60 ºC (0 min) to 240 ºC
(20 min) at 4 ºC/min. Sample size for each injection was approximately 1 L in a 1:10 split mode.
4. Conclusions
The literature SOR data on the sandalwood olfactophore seem to point that the bulky hydrophobic
moiety of odorants such as -santalol (1) and campholenal derivatives 2–5 could be replaced by
substructures of similar steric bulk. Thus, new five bulky moiety modified analogues 33–37 of the
commercial sandalwood odorant Polysantol® (2) have been synthesized. Starting from the aldehydes
isovaleraldehyde (12), heptanal (13), citronellal (14), phenylacetaldehyde (15) and dihydronopal (18),
and by an expeditious sequence of aldol condensation with butanone, deconjugative -methylation of
the resulting -unsaturated ketones, and reduction of the corresponding -unsaturated ketones, the
new five analogues were prepared in good yield. These compounds 33–37 were organoleptically
evaluated and one of them (compound 37) seemed to be of special interest due to its natural
sandalwood scent, which means that the dihydronopyl group is able to mimic the bulky hydrophobic
center C of the sandalwood olfactophore. The other synthesized alcohols do not seem to be of interest
as odorants, although the branched-chain citronellal derivative 35 and the aromatic-ring
phenylacetaldehyde derivative 36 have some sandalwood notes, at least according to the GC sniffing
odour evaluation.

Molecules 2009, 14
2797
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología for partial financial support (R+D
Project PPQ2000-1665; partial financial support from the FEDER funds of the European Union) and
the Junta de Andalucía for partial financial support (research group FQM-182). We also greatly thank
Carles Ibáñez, Fina Caballer and Meritxell Antic of Lucta S.A. (Barcelona, Spain) for the odour
evaluation.
References and Notes
1. Brunke, E.J.; Klein, E. Fragrance Chemistry, The Science of the Sense of Smell; Academic Press:
New York, NY, USA, 1982; p. 397.
2. Ohloff, G.; Winter, B.; Fehr, C. Perfumes. Art, Science and Technology; Elsevier Applied
Science: London, UK, 1991; p. 287.
3. Fráter, G.; Bajgrowicz, J.A.; Kraft, P. Fragrance chemistry. Tetrahedron 1998, 54, 7633–7703.
4. Naipawer, R.E. Cyclopentene derivatives and their use as odorants. US4696766 (Priority 19
March 1986, to Givaudan & CIE); [Chem. Abstr. 1987, 106, 175828].
5. Chapuis, C.; Gautier, A.; Blanc, P.A. Use of optically active isomers of (E)-3,3-dimethyl-5-(2,2,3-
trimethyl-3-cyclopenten-1-yl-)-4-penten-2-ol in perfumery. US5512543 (Priority 17 Aug. 1993, to
Firmenich S.A.); [Chem. Abstr. 1995, 123, 17516].
6. Buchbauer, G.; Spreitzer, H.; Zechmeister-Machhart, F.; Klinsky, A.; Weiss-Greiler, P.;
Wolschann, P. Synthesis and olfactoric activity of keto--santalol and methoxy--santalol. Eur. J.
Med. Chem. 1998, 33, 463–470.
7. Buchbauer, G.; Stappen, I.; Pretterklieber, C.; Wolschann, P. Structure–activity relationships of
sandalwood odorants: synthesis and odor of tricyclo -santalol. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2004, 39,
1039–1046.
8. Hölscher, B.; Braun, N.A.; Weber, B.; Kappey, C.H.; Meier, M.; Pickenhagen, W.
Enantioselectivity in odor perception synthesis and olfactory properties of the new tricyclic
sandalwood odorant Fleursandol. Helv. Chim. Acta 2004, 87, 1666–1680.
9. Axel, R. Scents and sensibility: A molecular logic of olfactory perception (Nobel Lecture).
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 6111–6127.
10. Buck, L. Unraveling the sense of smell (Nobel Lecture). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2005, 44,
6128–6140.
11. Buchbauer, G.; Hillisch, A.; Mraz, K.; Wolschann, P. Conformational parameters of the
sandalwood-odor activity: conformational calculations on sandalwood odor. Part X. Helv. Chim.
Acta 1994, 77, 2286–2296.
12. Bajgrowicz, J.A.; Frank, I.; Fráter, G. Synthesis and structure elucidation of a new potent
sandalwood-oil substitute. Helv. Chim. Acta 1998, 81, 1349–1358.
13. Auger, B.; Bajgrowicz, J.A.; Giraudi, E. Preparation of formylpinanes for fragrances.
WO9311094 (Priority 5 December 1991, to Givaudan-Roure); [Chem. Abstr. 1993, 119, 146389].

Molecules 2009, 14
2798
14. Chapuis, C. Preparation of 3,3-dimethyl-5-(2,2,3-trimethyl-3-cyclohexenyl)-4-penten-2-ol
enantiomers and analogs as perfume fragrances. EP572797 (Priority 2 June 1992, to Firmenich);
[Chem. Abstr. 1994, 121, 83680].
15. Dimoglo, A.S.; Beda, A.A.; Shvets, N.M.; Gorvachov, M.Y.; Kheifits, L.A.; Aulchenko, I.S.
Investigation of the relationship between sandalwood odor and chemical structure: Electron-
topological approach. New J. Chem. 1995, 19, 149–154.
16. Wahren, U.; Sprung, I.; Schulze, K.; Findensen, M.; Buchbauer, G. Synthesis of syn- and anti-
epoxides of -campholenic and fencholenic derivatives. Tetrahedron Lett. 1999, 40, 5991–5992.
17. Ono, S.; Etsuno, J.; Fukuda, K.; Toi, S.; Fujikura, Y. 3-(3,3,5-Trimethylcyclohexyloxy)-1-
propanols and perfume compositions containing them. JP 7165655 (Priority 8 December 1993, to
Kao); [Chem. Abstr. 1995, 123, 208525].
18. Schulze, K.; Uhlig, H. Aroma chemical syntheses with fencholenic aldehyde. Monatsh. Chem.
1989, 120, 547–559.
19. Linares-Palomino, P.J.; Salido, S.; Altarejos, J.; Nogueras, M.; Sánchez, A. Synthesis and odor
evaluation of stereoisomers of octahydrobenzopyran derivatives. Flavour Fragr. J. 2006, 21,
659–666.
20. Linares-Palomino, P.J.; Salido, S.; Altarejos, J.; Sánchez, A. Chlorosulfonic acid as a convenient
electrophilic olefin cyclization agent. Tetrahedron Lett. 2003, 44, 6651–6655.
21. Castro, J.M.; Salido, S.; Altarejos, J.; Nogueras, M.; Sánchez, A. Synthesis of Ambrox from
labdanolic acid. Tetrahedron 2002, 58, 5941–5949.
22. Castro, J.M.; Linares-Palomino, P.J.; Salido, S.; Altarejos, J.; Nogueras, M.; Sánchez, A.
Synthesis of Polysantol and related sandalwood-type odorants using magnesium -bromoketone
enolates. Tetrahedron Lett. 2004, 45, 2619–2622.
23. Castro, J.M.; Linares-Palomino, P.J.; Salido, S.; Altarejos, J.; Nogueras, M.; Sánchez, A.
Enantiospecific synthesis, separation and olfactory evaluation of all diastereomers of a homologue
of the sandalwood odorant Polysantol. Tetrahedron 2005, 61, 11192–11203.
24. Chapado, L.; Linares-Palomino, P.J.; Salido, S.; Nogueras, M.; Sánchez, A; Altarejos, J.
Preparation of a novel odorant with sandalwood fragrance. WO 2008092981 (Priority 31 January
2007, to University of Jaén); [Chem. Abstr. 2008, 149, 246672].
25. Höfinghoff, J.; Buchbauer, G.; Holzer, W.; Wolschann, P. Syntheses and odor of “bulky group”-
modified sandalwood odorants: isophorono-β-santalol analogues. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 41,
905–913, and references cited therein.
26. (1R)-(–)-Nopol is a commercially available compound, but it can be prepared by reaction of -
pinene with formaldehyde [28].
27. Heitmann, W.; Mätzel, U. Preparation of cis-dihydronopol. EP406742 (Priority 7 July 1989, to
Kali-Chemie Pharma GmbH); [Chem. Abstr. 1991, 114, 164560].
28. Eigenmann, G.W.; Arnold, R.T. Stereospecific hydrogenation of -pinene derivatives. J. Am.
Chem. Soc. 1959, 81, 3440–3442.
29. Corey, E.J.; Schmidt, G. Useful procedures for the oxidation of alcohols involving pyridinium
dichromate in aprotic media. Tetrahedron Lett. 1979, 20, 399–402.

Molecules 2009, 14
2799
30. We also obtained cis-dihydronopol (17) by hydrogenation of nopol (1 g) in absolute MeOH (50
mL) over Raney-Ni (1.5 g) under pressure of H2 gas on a hydrogenation apparatus for 48 h. The
GC analysis indicated a conversion of ca. 82% [24].
1
31. Kim, K.Y.; Lee, S.G. Complete assignment of H and 13C NMR spectra of trans- and cis-
myrtanol. Magn. Reson. Chem. 1997, 35, 451–454.
32. Badjah-Hadj-Ahmed, A.Y.; Meklati, B.Y.; Waton, H.; Pham, Q.T. Structural studies in the
bicyclo[3.1.1]heptane series by proton and carbon-13 NMR. Magn. Reson. Chem. 1992, 30,
807–816.
33. Azzaroni, F.; Biscarini, P.; Bordoni, S.; Longoni, G.; Venturini, E. Catalytic hydroformylation of
(1S,5S)-(–)- and (1R,5R)-(+)--pinene: stereoselective synthesis and spectroscopic
characterization of (1S,2R,5S)-, (1S,2S,5S)-, (1R,2R,5R)- and (1R,2S,5R)-10-formylpinane. J.
Organomet. Chem. 1996, 508, 59–67.
34. Tishchenko, I.G.; Bubel, O.N.; Kovaleva, A.F. Oxides of some of -unsaturated ketones with
branched chains. Zhur. Org. Khim. 1965, 1, 869–873; [Chem. Abstr. 1965, 63, 38927].
35. Naipawer, R.E.; Easter, W.M. 3-Methyl-5-(2,2,3-trimethylcyclopent-3-en-1-yl)pentan-2-ol
compound and perfume compositions. US4052341 (Priority 29 April 1976, to Givaudan Corp.);
[Chem. Abstr. 1978, 88, 22229].
36. Zhao, H.; Cai, M.Z. Stereoselective synthesis of (Z--unsaturated ketones via
hydromagnesiation of alkynylsilanes. Synth. Commun. 2003, 33, 1643–1650.
37. Mahrwald, R.; Schick, H. Synthesis of -unsaturated carbonyl compounds by titanium
tetraalkoxide-induced aldol condensation under neutral conditions. Synthesis 1990, 7, 592–595.
38. Together with compound 20, the α,β-unsaturated aldehyde, (Z)-2-pentylnon-2-enal (21) was
obtained (24% yield) [37]. Despite the molar excess of butanone over heptanal (4:1), the reaction
between two molecules of the aldehyde 13 was also feasible. This type of by-product (aldol self
condensation), also observed in the case of phenylacetaldehyde (15), is largely due to the well-
known acid-base equilibrium established between heptanal (13) and the enolate ion of butanone.
39. Robert, F.; Héritier, J.; Quiquerez, J.; Simian, H.; Blank, I. Synthesis and sensorial properties of
2-alkylalk-2-enals and 3-(acetylthio)-2-alkyl alkanals. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52,
3525–3529.
40. Sasaki, K. A modified Wittig synthesis of 6,10-dimethyl-3,9-undecadien-2-one, ethyl 5,9-
dimethyl-2,8-decadienonate, and their -alkyl homologs: stereochemistry of the reaction and
conformation of the products. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1968, 41, 1252–1254.
41. Sasaki, K. Cyclization of 6,10-dimethyl-3,9-undecadien-2-one and its homologs by concentrated
phosphoric acid. Nippon Kagaku Zasshi 1968, 89, 1140–1141; [Chem. Abstr. 1969, 70, 87446].
42. Dana, G.; Gharbi-Benarous, J.; Thuan, S.L.T. Dehydration of -ethylenic 1,2-diols. IV. Role of
the stereomutation of -hydroxyl allylic carbocations on the orientation of observed reactions.
Can. J. Chem. 1980, 58, 1451–1462.
43. Sato, T.; Watanabe, M.; Watanabe, T.; Onoda, Y.; Murayama, E. Trisubstituted stannyllithium as
a double electron equivalent. Reaction with ,-enones. J. Org. Chem. 1988, 53, 1894–1899.
44. Kim, J.H.; Kulawiec, R.J. A Tandem epoxide isomerization-aldol condensation process catalyzed
by palladium acetate-tributylphosphine. J. Org. Chem. 1996, 61, 7656–7657, and references
cited therein.

Molecules 2009, 14
2800
45. The presence of the β,γ-unsaturated ketone 25, along with the desired 24 (24:25; 4:1) was not
necessarily a drawback, since it was also a suitable reactant for the subsequent deconjugative α-
methylation step. For that reason no chromatographic separation was undertaken. Furthermore,
the NMR data of both isomers 24 and 25 agree with those already reported [46].
46. Chang, S.; Yoon, J.; Brookhart, M. Carbon-carbon bond forming reactions of 3-allyl iron
tricarbonyl anions with carbon electrophiles. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 1869–1879.
47. Mookherjee, B.D.; Trenkle, R.W.; Wolff, R.K.; Boden, R.M.; Yoshida, T. Use of methyl-
substituted pinyl oxopentenes, for augmenting, enhancing or modifying the aroma or taste of
smoking tobacco and smoking tobacco articles. US4428387 (Priority 26 March 1982, to IFF);
[Chem. Abstr. 1984, 101, 20773].
48. Naipawer, R.E. Cyclopentene derivatives and their use as odorants. EP0203528 (Priority 31 May
1985, to Givaudan & CIE); [Chem. Abstr. 1986, 106, 175828].
49. Bajgrowicz, J.A.; Fráter, G. Preparation of optically pure isomers of campholenic aldehyde
derivatives for use as detergent fragrances. EP0841318 (Priority 6 November 1996, to Givaudan-
Roure); [Chem. Abstr. 1998, 129, 28103].
50. Armesto, D.; Ortiz, M.J.; Agarrabeitia, A.R.; Martín-Fontecha, M. Novel Oxa-di- -methane and
Norrish type I reactions in the S2 *) excited state of a series of -unsaturated ketones. Org.
Lett. 2005, 7, 2687–2690.
51. de Graauw, C.F.; Peters, J.A.; van Bekkum, H.; Huskeus, J. Meerwein-Ponndorf-Verley
reductions and Oppenauer oxidations: an integrated approach. Synthesis 1994, 10, 1007–1017.
52. Yoshii, F.; Yamada, Y.; Hoshy, T.; Hagiwara, H. The creation of a database of odorous
compounds focused on molecular rigidity and analysis of the molecular features of the
compounds in the database. Chem. Senses 2002, 27, 399–405.
Sample Availability: Samples of the compounds are available from the authors.
© 2009 by the authors; licensee Molecular Diversity Preservation International, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative
Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).